Políticas recientes en el nivel secundario de adultos en la provincia de Buenos Aires: los desafíos de la flexibilidad en la enseñanza
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La educación de adultos de nivel secundario en la provincia de Buenos Aires vivió, en estos últimos años, ciertas modificaciones en la organización de dos de las principales ofertas vigentes que concentran la mayor cantidad de matrícula en la actualidad: el Plan Fines y los Centros Educativos de Nivel Secundario (CENS). Desde 2018 la Dirección de Adultos de la provincia de Buenos Aires unificó los formatos de cursada de ambas propuestas, que ya compartían el mismo diseño curricular (Resolución 6321/95), aunque con un formato cuatrimestralizado en el caso de Fines y con formato anual en los CENS. En este artículo presentamos algunas de las problemáticas identificadas con relación a cómo estas propuestas con formatos más flexibles afectan los procesos de enseñanza.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".